The freeman. (Parkersburg, W. Va.) 1886-18??, 1887-12-14
But by whom or by what au-

Wn0tn0f the Manufacture Vi par
ticular articles of drink, either for
general use or for the personal use
Of the maker, will injuriously at
feet the public? Power to deter.
mine such questions, 80 as to bind
all, must exist somewhere, else 60
ciety will be at the mercy of the
few who, regarding only their own
appetites or passions, may be will
ling to imperil the peace and go.
curity Of the many, provided only
they are permitted to do as they
please. Under our system that
power is lodged with the legisla-
tive branches of the Government
1t belongs to that department to
exert what are known as the po-
lice powers OF the State. 1t must
determine primarily what measures
are appropriate or needful for the
protection of the public morals,
the public health or the public
safety.
1t does not at all follow from
these princi Piles that every statute
enacted ostensibly for the promo
ton of these ends is to be accepted
as legitimate exertion of the pol
ice powers of the State. There are
of necessity limits beyond which
legislation
CAN NOT RIGHTFULLY GO.
AS the Courts must obey the
rather than the law
making department of the Govern
ment, it must, upon its RESPONSE
bility, determine whether in any
particular case these limits have
been passed. The Courts are not
bound by mere pretenses.
They are at liberty, indeed, are
under a solemn duty, to look at the
su distance of things whenever they
enter upon the inquiry whether the
legislature has transgressed the linn
its of its authority. If, therefore,
statute purporting to have been
enacted to protect the public health,
the public morals or the public
safety, has no real or substantial
relation to those Objects, or is a pal
pable invasion Of rights secured by
the fundamental law, it is the duty
of the Courts to so adjudge, and
thereby give effect to the constitu
ton.
Keeping in view these principles
as governing the relations with
each other of the Judicial and Leg
islative departments of the Gov
eminent, it is difficult to perceive
any ground for the Judiciary to
declare that the prohibition by
Kansas of the manufacture or sale
within her limits of intoxicating
liquors for general use there as
beverage, is not fairly adapted to
the end of protecting the commun-
ity against the evils which confess
eddy result from the excessive use
of ardent spirits.
There is here no justification for
holding that the State, under the
guise merely of police regulations,
is aiming to deprive the citizen of
his constitutional rights; for we
can not shut cut OF view the fact,
within the knowledge of all, that
the public health, the public NOR
ais, and the public safety may be
endangered by the general use of
Intoxicating d inks Nor can we
ignore the fact established by sta
tistics, accessible to every one, that
the disorder, pauperism and crime
prevalent in the country are in
large measure
DIRECTLY TRACEABLE
to this evil. If, therefore, State
deems the absolute prohibition oil
the manufacture and sale within
her limits of intoxicating liquors
for other than medical, scientific
and manufacturing purposes to be
necessary to the peace and security
of society, the Courts can not, with.
out usurping legislative functions,
override the will of the people as
thus expressed by their chosen rep
resentatives.
1t is fundamental principle in
our institutions, indispensable to
the preservation of public liberty
that one of the separate denart